the pollution load can be reduced to an extent not to overtax water filtration plant capacities, protect bathing areas, and shellfish grounds and assist in reduction of water-borne diseases.

18. What are the usual methods of sewage treatment?

(1) The removal of suspended sewage solids by settling in various types of sedimentation tanks and the disposal of the solids thereby obtained, by drying, incineration, or digestion. (2) The oxidation of the remaining sewage materials to change them into stable mineral substances on sand filters, trickling filters, or by the activated sludge process; or by a combination of these processes. Intermediate between (1) and (2) are the use of chemical precipitants to increase sedimentation. (3) The disinfection of sewage with chlorine to eliminate disease-producing bacteria and to prevent sickness.

19. What degree of treatment of sewage is usually necessary?

It varies, depending on the character of the raw sewage and wastes, the quantity of dilution water available for final disposal and on other factors. By sedimentation it is possible to remove from raw sewage ordinarily from 50 to 75 percent of total suspended solid matter, from 80 to 95 percent of settleable solids, and about 30 to 35 percent of total organic matter. By the activated sludge process, over 90 percent of suspended matter, 90 percent of the biochemical oxygen demand, and 95 to 98 percent of the pathogenic bacteria of raw sewage can be removed.

20. How much does sewage treatment cost?

It depends upon the degree of treatment provided. A cost of approximately $10 per capita would suffice to cover the cost of adequate sewage treatment for most cities.

21. What are some of the industrial wastes?

The most serious water pollution by industrial wastes results from the manufacture and finishing of various textile products, pulp and paper, coke and gas, leather, sugar, certain chemical products, canning of food, preparation of milk and milk products, slaughtering, and the production of meat products. Other substances of a polluting character are, acid coal-mine wastes, oil-field operation brines, refining petroleum products, waste waters, and wastes from the manufacture of rubber using reclaimed materials.

22. What are the methods of treatment of industrial wastes?

Methods may be classified as, (1) those which involve reprocessing and salvaging the material within the plant, and (2) those which simply dispose of it in the least harmful or costly manner. Substantial savings can be made in some cases by waste utilization. Although profitable recovery is not possible in all cases, it should be the first objective in any waste-disposal program.

23. What is the cost of treatment of industrial wastes?

As the wastes from each plant are a specific problem, it is difficult to say, although as a general average it should not exceed the cost for treatment of an equivalent quantity of domestic sewage. Many wastes are susceptible to the usual sewage treatment methods, such as trickling filters, activated sludge, and anaerobic digestion.

24. Is the treatment of industrial wastes mandatory under the terms of this proposed act?

The treatment of industrial wastes is not mandatory except insofar as required by existing or future State laws and regulations. The provisions of the proposed act, by making available Federal loans

to industries, is intended to facilitate compliance with the State requirements.

25. Do streams and bodies of water rid themselves of pollution by self-purification?

Self-purification of streams is a well-known phenomenon. It is the aim of economic sewage disposal to utilize this fact and not to overburden the stream.

26. If this is true, why is the treatment of sewage and industrial wastes needed?

In order to limit the organic pollution load on the stream and to eliminate pathogenic disease-producing bacteria.

27. What is the limit of purification capacity of a water filtration plant?

According to recent studies of the Public Health Service, the average B. coli index of the raw water as delivered for treatment, when considered over a significantly long period of time, such as a year, should in no case exceed 5,000 per 100 cc and should not exceed 20,000 per 100 cc during more than 5 percent of the period considered.

28. What water plants, or in what sections of the United States, are plants which exceed these limits of capacity?

Water plants located on certain sections of the Ohio River, notably at East Liverpool, Steubenville, and between Huntington and Portsmouth; on the lower end of Lake Michigan, notably at Whiting and East Chicago; on the lower Delaware River at Philadelphia and Chester; on the Hudson River at Albany; and on the Mahoning River at Youngstown; have annual average B. coli indices ordinarily ranging upward from 5,000 to 20,000 or more.

29. Is it dangerous to drink water that comes from sewage-polluted sources, even though the water has been put through a filtration plant?

Ordinarily it is not dangerous to drink such waters which have received filtration and chlorination in a modern filter plant receiving a raw water supply not exceeding the safe limits for the raw water pollution. With increasing pollution, toxic chemical end products of organic pollution or of industrial wastes, which cause intestinal disturbances, are complicating treatment methods.

30. Is not the problem of stream pollution or control one for State rather than Federal authorities to deal with?

The problem of stream pollution or control is one calling for joint action on the part of all interests concerned. Unless the Federal Government takes the initative in stimulating State cooperative procedures on a uniform basis, individual States will be hard pressed in endeavoring to control the situation.

31. What interstate bodies of water are polluted?

Interstate streams such as the Ohio River, interstate lakes such as the southern or lower end of Lake Michigan, and interstate coastal streams and bodies of water, such as the Connecticut River, New York Harbor, and the Delaware River, are polluted with sewage and industrial wastes.

32. Have some States spent large sums of money on stream pollution control measures but accomplished very little?

The expenditures of most State health departments have been on research, investigations, and recommendations. Due to the lack of public demand until recently, these activities have formed part of the general health work of the State. In the absence of public demand


for enforcement procedures until now, this phase of the problem has not received the consideration needed, due to lack of appropriations for this purpose.

33. Under this act, would some industries be penalized or burdened with the cost of expensive waste treatment works?

This Federal act would not affect any particular industries, as all enforcement procedures would be undertaken by the States, under State laws. Uniformity of regulation by the several States would mean that all industries discharging deleterious wastes would receive equal consideration.

34. Are all industrial wastes susceptible of treatment to eliminate deleterious effects on receiving bodies of water?

There are certain types of wastes for which practicable and economical methods of treatment are lacking, which will require research and study to solve. The wastes of each particular type of industry are a problem unto itself, which calls for technical and scientific consideration in waste utilization and disposal procedures.

35. What are the effects on fish life of sewage and industrial wastes?

A minimum of about 2 parts per million of dissolved oxygen is necessary in streams to support fish life. If the amount of disolved oxygen in the water is such that the fish life cannot obtain the requisite supply of oxygen, they will die. If the water is seriously polluted with sewage and industrial wastes which take up the oxygen to depletion, fish life will not be supported. Some substances, such as acids and ions of heavy metals, are themselves highly toxic to fish and waterfowl. Others, although relatively nontoxic to fish or birds, are toxic to the delicate animals and plants which constitute the food of fish and waterfowl.

36. Have brewery and distillery wastes complicated stream pollution problems?

These wastes have added very considerably to the load of organic and bacterial pollution in streams in which discharged. For example, at one distillery where facilities for the treatment of wastes have been provided, with a good return on the investment, the wastes of this distillery alone, if they had been discharged to streams, would have been equal to the sewage from approximately one million people.

37. What standards are there for limiting the pollution of streams?

A number of standards of water quality for various purposes have been proposed, but with certain exceptions there has been no general acceptance because they are based on opinions and somewhat loosely correlated experience rather than on systematic observational data. Among these standards are: (1) Drinking and domestic water standards; (2) industrial water-supply standards; (3) standards for sources of purified water supplies; (4) standards for recreational waters, including those used for bathing; (5) standards for the maintenance of aquatic life; (6) standards for agricultural waters; (7) standards of general cleanliness; and (8) standards of quality of water from which shellfish may be taken for direct sale.

38. Is it true that in England and Germany governmental authorities have worked on the control of stream pollution for years with limited success?

River conservancy boards have been in existence in these countries for some years. The control of such agencies, which have included industrial participation, has largely been handled on a regional basis. Their success has been measurable by the public demand, as the administration of the law and financing of work has been left to the local interests within the respective drainage areas.

39. How would an interstate metropolitan area receive aid for pollution control under the terms of this act?

The Federal Government could aid through research studies, investigations and technical advice and recommendations. By the Federal funds allotted to the State health departments, the States could help similarly and would be in a better position to bring about concerted action. Federal grants-in-aid and loans would be available for the preparation of the engineering plans and the construction of remedial works.

40. What are the drastic or mandatory features of this legislation?

The proposed Federal legislation contains no drastic or mandatory features. It provides a continuing Federal policy for cooperation with the States, all enforcement features being in the hands of the State, as is now the case.

41. Can certain industrial wastes be treated more cheaply with municipal sewage than separately?

In some instances, industrial wastes, if mixed with domestic sewage in proper proportions, can be handled more effectively at a municipal sewage-disposal plant than at a separate industriel waste-treatment plant. Auxiliary works at points of industrial waste discharge sometimes adapt such wastes for admission to the public system.

42. What phase of the stream-pollution control problem is in most need of correction at the present time?

As the organic pollution load contributed by industry is about equal to that contributed by sewered population, both municipal sewage and industrial wastes are pressing problems. By the proper treatment of domestic sewage within a reasonable period of time, the urgency of the industrial wastes problem may lessen due to the decreased pollution burden on streams.

43. Why do not cities charge rent for sewer connections to provide funds for sewage treatment and also charge industry for the privilege of using the public sewers for their excessive or undesirable wastes?

Some State laws permit the imposition of charges for sewer rental. In one city an additional charge is to be placed upon water consumers in proportion to their consumption, to pay the cost of sewage-treatment works. In Germany the cost of all sewage and industrial wastes works is assessed equitably upon all within the drainage area who contribute to pollution or who benefit from the remedial works.

44. How much is it estimated that this act will cost the Federal Government annually for grants-in-aid to build sewage-treatment works?

The amount of this cost depends to a great extent upon the per centum set by Congress as the Federal contribution. On the assumption of a 50 percent grant-in-aid, it is estimated that the amount of applications from municipalities, with consideration of the engineering magnitude of design and construction, would not texceed $10,000,000 annually.

45. How much is it estimated that this act will cause the Federal Government annually to loan to municipalities and industry?

It is difficult to answer this question in view of the probably lessened application for Federal loans with the cessation of the depression and the possibility of commercial loans as in previous financing. It is

safe to assume, however, that the total annual amount of loans would not exceed the amount of the grants-in-aid.

46. What do the States propose to do with the funds allotted by the Federal Government under this act?

The States, under regulations for Federal allotments, would probably be called upon to match the Federal funds with equal amounts of State funds. This money would pay for research, investigations, engineering and laboratory studies, and for the necessary technical stimulation and promotion of local projects under the State laws and regulations in cooperation with industry and the political subdivisions.

47. What will the Public Health Service do with the funds appropriated annually for the Division of Stream Pollution Control by this act?

The Public Health Service would engage in research, field investigations, and technical advice to the States on a systematic basis, with the background of its previous experience. An important new line of work would be supervision of the State allotments and the administration of the grants-in-aid and loans to municipalities and industries.

48. Is there any question as to the constitutionality of this act?

There appears to be no apparent question as to the constitutionality of this act, as it does not infringe upon State rights as there is no attempt therein to regulate control from the States.

49. Is this act the opening wedge to more drastic Federal legislation for the control of stream pollution in the future?

There is no indication that this act is a tendency in the direction of Federal control. Public health matters of this character, involving general welfare and protection of the public health, are more readily handled on a cooperative basis with State and local authorities and industry than by rigid centralized control.

50. Will the construction of reservoirs for flood control and for the conservation of water resources improve stream pollution conditions?

It is doubtful if such measures will materially affect the problem of stream pollution. By the equalizing of stream flows, it may tend to lessen the aggravated phases of the problem in times of drought, and may provide more even quantities of water for dilution, but otherwise it will not alter the load of municipal and industrial wastes pollution of streams.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, one thing about the charts, Mr. Vinson. It is going to be difficult to get those things in the printed hearings, but it can be done. What is your view about it?

Mr. VINSON. As I understand it, Mr. Biery is not making a request for all the charts.

The CHAIRMAN. There is some of the documentary evidence with charts, that would be very helpful, if we could get them in the record. But it is somewhat expensive and delays the printing of the hearings.

Mr. BIERY. Might I suggest, Judge Mansfield, that there are two very important charts that should go in the record, that present typical situations, and both happen to relate to Cincinnati? "One is the map that you looked at yesterday, and the other is the chart that will be presented by Mr. Hibbs. I would suggest that those two be incorporated.

Now, only one further statement, and that is, that a part of the program my committee undertook was a study of the regional aspects of this thing. It has been said that the States find it difficult to

« ForrigeFortsett »